Total debates: 276
Substance being the most enduring and underlying reality of a thing.
Rated debate on whether God exists! Consider debating me :)
The pro side will be arguing that "If God does not exist, then morality is speculative at best." And the con side will argue that morality can be grounded independent of the view that God exists.
Altruism: the act of doing something that has no Benifet to yourself to only benifet others.
Prove "Triadic Dimensional-Distinction Vortical Paradigm" is NOT very versatile in explaining numerous facets of reality without contradiction numerous facets of reality; in meaning, it explains many of our realities as in the way we see the world in the normal scale, without contradiction; for there to pose no opposition to the explanation of many of our realities as in the way see the world in the normal scale.
The Pro side will be arguing that AI is ruining the art of debate and that AI is making humanity stupid in general. And the con side will argue that using AI does not ruin debate, but it rather enhances it in some respect.
I will try to prove that with existence we suffer.
Is absolute certainty, the kind Descartes tried to find, possible?
The debate resolution is "Science is not objective." This debate will follow the 3 rules of Civil Debate. - https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/376 Each participant will award and/or deduct up to 6 points to their opponent per round with the stipulation that points can never go below zero. The judge will award "arguments" (3 points) to the participant with the highest points tally at the end of the debate. In the event of a tie, no vote will be registered by the judge.
No description has been provided
I will try to prove that with birth we suffer.
How much of a problem is the problem of evil?
No description has been provided
Tournament finals. Full description is inside.
Rationality is not the centre of human nature
Free will is one of those "hard" philosophical problems. We have the intuition that we choose freely. But on closer consideration, I say that this is an persistent illusion.
A debate topic the likes of which DART has never seen before. Though I can't guarantee it'll be any good.
I am arguing That you don't need money to live a rich life. I want relatively experienced debaters to take me on. I need to see how good I am.
A thought on a possible new form of governing.
No description has been provided
Logic is absolute all over the world and morality is considered to be it's antithesis, but I argue that they originate from the same point and end at the same point.
The purpose of the cosmological argument is to demonstrate that God exists. I will argue it fails to do this.
No description has been provided
Is math just a human construct, or is it objective? (The topic will be better defined this time.)
Con will be arguing for Pro Choice
The burden of proof is on Atheists to prove that meaning and morality can exist in a universe with complete annihilation, no God, no gods, no afterlife, no reincarnation or nothing transcendent whatsoever except for math or what have you. I will be arguing for Theism of all sorts, and why any sort of Theism makes more sense then Atheism in regards to consciousness and it's well being.
Unrated because of the seemingly insane position
No description has been provided
Only SkepticalOne can accept.
Is math just a human construct, or is it objective?
Ich hatte völlig berechtigt das, die Seifenblase zu zerplatzen.
Idealism and anti-idealism are two philosophical theories that center around the nature of reality and the relationship between the mind and the world. Idealists argue that reality is essentially mental or spiritual in nature, whereas anti-idealists deny this and assert that reality is fundamentally material. The debate has far-reaching implications for various fields, from metaphysics and epistemology to ethics and politics.
Is morality objective? Or is it only subjective, and based on principles of right and wrong that differs for each individuals own personal framework?
Being willing to do good without an expressed expectation of reciprocal energy or resources, in my view, only works if there's a tacit agreement that the other party/parties will be harmed if you are.
I'm hoping to find someone to engage in debate with on this topic, and hopefully exchange new ideas and give interesting arguments. Just for clarity: veganism is a moral philosophy and lifestyle that seeks to exclude, as far as practicable and possible. all forms of animal exploitation, for food, clothing, and any other purpose. and therefore , holds the moral stance that the unnecessary killing of animals is morally wrong.
Is the Holy Spirit of God's supernatural revelation, whereby a man may know and understand the veracity of His word in the Holy Scriptures (66 books of the Bible), sufficiently valid as a scientific means of substantiating the truth of God's word in the Holy Scriptures?
I believe that finitism, the belief that the concept of infinity is invalid, is entirely false.
Empiricists believe that all knowledge comes from ones experience and experimentation. Rationalists believe that all knowledge come from logic and reason.
No description has been provided
I had a discussion on this topic during class earlier this week and the prompt intrigued. So I brought that topic here to debate.
This topic is regarding the philosophical study of beauty called Aesthetics.
I haven't ever done this before but I will argue con meaning I think death penalty shouldn't be allowed. If I am not quick to respond I apologise I am new to this
No description has been provided
Hello everyone! The evils of Socialism have pervaded society for long enough. Now it is our job to expose it to the light of debate. Please accept if you agree to the given definition of Socialism in the description and are willing to defend it and the governments that follow its doctrine.
No description has been provided
The ethics of genetic engineering is a debate topic that focuses on the moral considerations of using technology to modify the genetic makeup of living organisms. This can include treating genetic disorders, creating genetically modified crops, or potentially creating new species. The debate often centers on questions of safety, fairness, and potential consequences. Supporters argue for potential benefits, while opponents raise ethical concerns.
No description has been provided